Court Backs Rule Denying Gifted Classes

Commonwealth Court Friday upheld a lower panel's ruling denying an Easton man special education for his gifted daughter at the Easton Area School District.

Drew Anderson of College Hill sought a gifted education program for his daughter, Huldah, when she was graduated to the district's Shawnee Junior High School, which does not have such a program.

He filed a formal complaint with the state's Special Education Appeals Panel in April 1991, requesting a gifted program for the junior high level, reimbursement for legal fees, and the cost of an independent evaluation for his daughter. That panel sided with the district and denied all of Anderson's requests.

He then appealed the case to the Commonwealth Court, which handed down its ruling Friday.

"It's a giant step backward for gifted education in this state," Anderson said of the ruling. "Pennsylvania has disenfranchised the gifted child from virtually all procedural safeguards."

Anderson's daughter was enrolled in the district's "Pull-Out" program for gifted children while attending the Easton Middle School. Without a gifted program at Shawnee, Anderson's daughter is enrolled in "enriched" classes at the school. But her father contends that program does not meet high enough standards of a gifted program.

In its ruling, Commonwealth Court said Anderson failed in his case primarily because he cited the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act as precedent for his claim. That act applies solely to special education and not to gifted education, the court ruled.

However, the court did chide the district for how it handled Anderson's complaint.

The district never forwarded the initial complaint to the state's Right to Education office, although by law it was required to upon receipt from the parent. It was Anderson, and not the district, who eventually notified the Right to Education office.

"It is simply not within the discretion of the school district to decide which processes it will and will not follow, no matter how well intentioned the motives," wrote Judge Robert L. Byer in Friday's ruling.

He continued: "It truly is unfortunate when the proper education of a gifted child must be determined through an adversarial litigation process ... There must be more cooperation by school districts in addressing the legitimate concerns of parents of gifted children than occurred at least initially in this case."

The court also upheld the panel's decision denying Anderson attorney's fees as well as the cost of an independent evaluation for his daughter, now in the 9th grade.